the polar bear climate change photo

Started Mar 24, 2007 | Discussions
Gordon Pritchard Regular Member • Posts: 209
the polar bear climate change photo

There's an interesting story about an iconic photograph that was distributed worldwide last month by Canada's Environment Ministry, and for which the Canadian government is about to be sued by an Alaskan photographer. The photo has been published in hundreds of newspapers. The article is here:

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=5961259b-de08-4532-850b-09d4753bed39&k=88988

Although they distributed it, Environment Canada says it's not their picture, and being a government agency they did not charge news agencies for use of the photo. Interesting also is that there is some confusion as to who actually took the photo since it was downloaded to a shipboard shared computer used by other folks who were also taking pics.

The photo, taken in summer, shows two polar bears on a melting ice floe in the Beaufort Sea, north of Barrow, Alaska. "It's just too cute to be true," Mr. Simard (a spokesman for Environment Canada) said. "You have to keep in mind that the bears are not in danger at all. It was, if you will, their playground for 15 minutes, you know what I mean? This is a perfect picture for climate change, in a way, because you have the impression they are in the middle of the ocean and they are going to die, with a Coke in their hands. But they were not that far from the coast, and it was possible for them to swim... They are still alive and having fun."

best, gordo

J A K Forum Pro • Posts: 15,833
Beware of politicians bearing gifts.

Who said that?

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia/original

SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

Ryan McDaniel Regular Member • Posts: 449
Symbolic of the entire fraudulent climate change movement

Let's see...we have the infamous "hockey stick" graph showing dramatic warming, beyond anything in Earth's history, in just the past century. Completely and thoroughly debunked as a lie and quietly removed from the U.N.'s latest report (even though many enviros no doubt still use it).

Then we have the computer simulations predicting run away warming for the 21st century. That is, as long as you feed them the "right" inputs. Only problem is they're not matching what we've observed in just the few years we've been using them to alarm the world. So the U.N. quietly reduced their predicted range of warming in the latest report.

And then there was the NYT story about the north pole melting away. Only problem was some Navy guy remembered and pulled out photos from early nuclear sub visits where...GASP...there were massive areas of open water at the north pole. During the 60's. Coolest part of the 20th century. Cooling so "great" that it spawned the "global cooling" scare of the 70's.

What else...oh yes...we have the movement's top preacher lecturing everyone on energy use...while he consumes 20x the energy of the average American family at just one of his three homes. "I buy credits!" he explains. Credits which reduce the total amount of CO2 output by exactly...ZERO. (Lookup: shell game.) Green Gore even has the option at his infamous home to purchase only wind power at a slightly higher cost. But I guess when your yearly bill is $30,000, you go for cheap coal.

And now poor, defenseless, hopeless polar bears, clinging to one of the last pieces of ice in the north, desperate for help before they drown. (I can just hear Al Gore's audience gasping!) Only, they're not drowning, they're playing. And they're not depressed, they're happy. And they're not desperate, they're close to an ice shore and swam out to the little bits of ice for some fun.

And if you study their numbers, you find they're not in any real danger, and in fact would be growing if the world would ban all polar bear hunting!

On top of that, it took a court order to get the crooks to pay the photographer to misuse his image. If I were the photographer, I would have sought an injunction against its misuse by environmentalists.

What a pathetic joke this all is. And to think of all the time and money wasted on "global warming" while their are children in the world starving to death.

Ryan McDaniel Regular Member • Posts: 449
You have to be a complete fool...

...to see a picture of some polar bears playing on some ice and think they're there because the north pole melted and they're dying. Are the people who attend Al Gore's lectures really so ignorant?

I know, I know...dumb question. If they're attending an Al Gore lecture....

Chato Forum Pro • Posts: 46,027
Well, you are of course a complete fool, so no surprise

Ryan McDaniel wrote:

...to see a picture of some polar bears playing on some ice and
think they're there because the north pole melted and they're
dying. Are the people who attend Al Gore's lectures really so
ignorant?

I know, I know...dumb question. If they're attending an Al Gore
lecture....

The Polar Bear is now threatened by global warming, or if YOU choose you can come up with any reason at all - nonetheless ALL those who study the Polar bear say it is in danger of disappearing. Dumb photograph or not, such is the case. Drowning was never the issue in this photograph and the people who released it never claimed that. The issue for Polar Bears is very simple, open water is not freezing at the normal times, and the bear, dependent on hunting seals, are starting to starve to death. This is only a minor symptom of the greater problem/

The rest of your argument is nonsense as well. It rests on the Stalinist premise of science being a total product of politics - in YOUR case, Liberal or Conservative "science."

Twenty years ago, according to YOUR reasoning most scientists were Conservative because they doubted that global warming, even if occuring, was caused by human activity. Now, once again according to you, they have decided to become "liberal" and back the idea that not only is global warming occurring, but it is human made.

All and I mean ALL climatologists, with the exception of a handful of cranks, have now proven the above. Your evidence doesn't exist, it was made up complete out of the kind of fantasies that one gets from being addicted to Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly.

Recently I read a column propounding your beliefs at NewsMax.com. The columnist stated that this was one of the most brutal winters on record, and how dare these clowns claim that global warming was occuring. Of course, it's one of the warmest on record, and the writer wrote during a legitimate cold snap. How touching.

NB.

The bottom line of your post is that only Neocons are honest, liberals always lie and make things up. And since you disagree with the worlds scientists, ergo, they are liberals putting forth a "liberal agenda."

(I will pause and point out that the majority of Conservatives, while I may disagree with them, do not hold this appalling world view. This is strictly a Neeocon thing, which is the same as saying a fringe element thing...)

Much the same argument is used for everrything - and no matter how often you clowns are proved wrong, it doesn't disturb your reasoning one bit. Whether WMD's in Iraq, or Polar Bears facing extinction, it's all part of the Great Liberal Plot to destroy the world. And whether the source is actually a Conservative or a Liberal, they MUST be really liberals. "Surrender Monkies," or "Alarmists or "traitors." And they are that because of course they've proved to be right.

Dave

rander3127 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,628
Re: the polar bear climate change photo
-- hide signature --

Well then if that isn't absolute proof we should spend $1.5 trillion a year fighting this fiction, I don't know what is!!!
-Rich
Olympus E-1 and lots of lenses
CANADIANS using UPS: Beware hidden brokerage charges!

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/

Ryan McDaniel Regular Member • Posts: 449
An Al Gore Disciple is in the house!

Chato wrote:

The Polar Bear is now threatened by global warming,

On what basis do you justify labeling a relatively stable population of animals "threatened"?

ALL
those who study the Polar bear say it is in danger of disappearing.

Typical environmentalist fallacy: "ALL people agree with me. ALL people say it's true. EVERYONE knows it. You MUST agree because ALL people agree." Repeat it enough and you can even get some of the simple minded to believe it.

Sorry, "ALL" people do not agree with you. "ALL" scientists do not say the same thing.

The polar bear is not in danger of disappearing. Some populations are decreasing, others are increasing, and others are stable. All this despite the fact that 1,000 bears are hunted each year.

If there's any long term decline in some of the polar bear populations, it could quickly be reversed to growth by wiping out the hunting.

Dumb photograph or not, such is the case. Drowning was never the
issue in this photograph and the people who released it never
claimed that. The issue for Polar Bears is very simple, open water
is not freezing at the normal times, and the bear, dependent on
hunting seals, are starting to starve to death.

BS. There are no "starving polar bears". No dead bears from lack of food. Just alarmist theories.

The rate and extent of the northern ice cap freeze is highly variable, as documented by the U.S. Navy and...heck...even the British Navy back in the day when they were an empire, before "global warming". (Yes, we have letters and journal entries describing open water in the north that are centuries old.)

You want to talk about open water, let's talk about what the ice cap was like when Greenland was a thriving colony during the climate optimum. Some how the polar bears managed then. What makes you think they're going to "starve to death" now?

If they ever get really hungry, they can start hunting the environmentalists following them around all day.

Twenty years ago, according to YOUR reasoning most scientists were
Conservative because they doubted that global warming, even if
occuring, was caused by human activity. Now, once again according
to you, they have decided to become "liberal" and back the idea
that not only is global warming occurring, but it is human made.

I never said or implied any such thing in my post. I don't know what you're talking about, but reading comprehension is apparently not high on your skill list.

All and I mean ALL climatologists, with the exception of a handful
of cranks, have now proven the above.

You're a crank for making such stupid claims. "ALL" climatologists DO NOT agree with the theory of human induced global warming, and you are in no position to question the work, education, or standing of those that are critical of the theory.

I hate that fallacy most of all. Who do you think you are to call accomplished scientists cranks just because they don't support your pet theory of the Earth? What qualifies you as judge?

Your evidence doesn't exist,
it was made up complete out of the kind of fantasies that one gets
from being addicted to Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly.

FACT: the planet warmed 0.6C from the time we started observing temperature until today.

FACT: that's well within natural variability, both in terms of total change and rate of change.

FACT: Earth is cooler today than it has been in recent history, including the medieval climate optimum. BTW, we have written descriptions of Greenland from that period that do not include the extend of ice we observe today. Yet, some how, polar bears survived.

FACT: the temperatures observed in the 20th century do not agree with predictions made by global warming models. Most of the warming occurred prior to the post-WWII ramp up in CO2 output. Post WWII saw a sustained cooling period despite dramatic increases in CO2 output.

Want me to continue? Why don't you actually go look up and study some temperature charts before telling me what "ALL" scientists think.

Recently I read a column propounding your beliefs at NewsMax.com.
The columnist stated that this was one of the most brutal winters
on record, and how dare these clowns claim that global warming was
occuring. Of course, it's one of the warmest on record, and the
writer wrote during a legitimate cold snap. How touching.

It's not one of the warmest on record, it's cooler than 05/06! And the "record" being used by NOAA only goes back 30 years. Which places the start of the series right smack in the middle of the 1950-1980 cooling period.

Let's start the series in the 30's or 40's, when average U.S. temperatures were HIGHER than they are today. That would make this winter average at best.

High, low, and average depend greatly on the series you're looking at. You can get a graph to tell you want you want just be carefully chosing your start and end points. So look beyond the Sierra Cub press releases.

The bottom line of your post is that only Neocons are honest,
liberals always lie and make things up.

Never said that. Again, the reading comprehension thing.

(I will pause and point out that the majority of Conservatives,
while I may disagree with them, do not hold this appalling world
view. This is strictly a Neeocon thing, which is the same as saying
a fringe element thing...)

So you accuse me of committing the fallacy of labeling "the world's scientists" as "liberals", all while blatantly committing the fallacy of labeling all who disagree with you "cranks" and "fringe elements"?

Such blind faith and devotion to the Al Gore cause cannot be argued with....

Ryan McDaniel Regular Member • Posts: 449
And by the way...

You managed to mouth off for an entire post without addressing a single point I actually made.

The infamous "hockey stick" temperature chart from past U.N. climate reports was quietly dropped from the latest report because it had been so thoroughly discredited by all those "crank neocon fringe elements". Or as normal people refer to them, dissenting scientists.

The latest report also had to tone down its temperature increase predictions because it's already painfully apparent that the old predictions do not line up with observations. (Prediction: expect more downward adjustments to come.)

The NYT did publish a story a few years back that the north pole was gone, based on photos of open water. And they did get egg on their face when people started to point out that, had they done some background research, they would have found plenty of photos of just as much open water from various U.S. Navy expeditions.

And the photo which started this thread is being used to imply that the polar bears are desperately clinging to a bit of melting ice when that was NOT the case at all.

Oh yes...and Al Gore is a fat, wasteful, hypocritical jerk for telling us how to live while he blows $30K on electricity alone. At just one house.

Now if you care to address any of my complaints, feel free. If all you want to do is call people cranks and neocons, go drink some Kool-Aid.

Marty4650
Marty4650 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,634
Why waste logic?

Ryan...

The earth has been "warming" for 10,000 years now. Since the last ice age ended. We are in an "interglacial" period, which is what happens when the natural cycle of warming and cooling occurs. In fact, 800 years ago the earth was considerably warmer than it is today. And there were no SUVs to blame for it back then....

Logic is wasted on those for who have adopted "Global Warming Alarmism" as their religion. Like other religions, you just can't talk people out of their beliefs. No amount of real scientific data will sway them. They will always insist that the "debate is over" and "they won."

The very next step is they will criminalize disagreement with them. I'm not making this up. The EU is actually considering making "Global Warming Denial" a crime....

Incidentally, since Global Warming Alarmism had been thoroughly debunked by real science, the environmental whackos have switched it to "Global Climate Change" as their real concern. All their past predictions of "Ice Age 1975" were wrong. Every 10 years Al Gore tells us we have "ten years left before the planet dies."

The main advantage of "Global Climate Change" over "Global Warming," is that anytime the weather changes they will be right. It did change! This will prevent the embarassment of them constantly being wrong.

-- hide signature --

Marty
Panasonic FZ20, Panasonic FZ7, Olympus C7000

 Marty4650's gear list:Marty4650's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R +11 more
Bill Force
Bill Force Veteran Member • Posts: 6,607
Re: You have to be a complete fool...

Of course they are ignorant, they're liberal nuts like Gore!
--

' You don't have to have the best of everything to get the best out of what you do have'.

Mi_Ri Regular Member • Posts: 329
please be specific

can you please indicate what real science is and who represents it

Incidentally, since Global Warming Alarmism had been thoroughly
debunked by real science,

-- hide signature --
Kenstrain Regular Member • Posts: 465
Re: An Al Gore Disciple is in the house!

This one interests me:-

Ryan McDaniel wrote:

FACT: the temperatures observed in the 20th century do not agree
with predictions made by global warming models. Most of the warming
occurred prior to the post-WWII ramp up in CO2 output. Post WWII
saw a sustained cooling period despite dramatic increases in CO2
output.

Recently I've noticed the apparent anti-correlation (your FACT quoted above) being used as an argument against CO2 related warming. There is also the argument that at earlier times there was no causal correlation (indeed that the CO2 concentration is determined by prior temperature history rather than the other way round).

If that apparent anti-correlation is not causal it probably should not be used in an anti-global warming science argument, even if its political utility is clear (for example for the fossil fuel industry:" look, we do no harm"). If it is causal the implication is that human activity is affecting the climate (but not in the way predicted by the naiive climate models).

I wonder if that could be partially due to cloud formation related to soot and other pollution, as well as non-anthropogenic changes (or some other anthropogenic cause).

I don't follow the literature on this though, nor do I have an opinion on whether there is causality.

Ken

Ken

Doyle Contributing Member • Posts: 627
Re: please be specific

Mi_Ri wrote:
can you please indicate what real science is and who represents it

Incidentally, since Global Warming Alarmism had been thoroughly
debunked by real science,

-- hide signature --

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p357.htm

During the past 2 years, more than 17,100 basic and applied American scientists, two-thirds with advanced degrees, have signed the Global Warming Petition.

Signers of this petition so far include 2,660 physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental scientists (select this link for a listing of these individuals) who are especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide on the Earth's atmosphere and climate.

Signers of this petition also include 5,017 scientists whose fields of specialization in chemistry, biochemistry, biology, and other life sciences (select this link for a listing of these individuals) make them especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide upon the Earth's plant and animal life.

Nearly all of the initial 17,100 scientist signers have technical training suitable for the evaluation of the relevant research data, and many are trained in related fields. In addition to these 17,100, approximately 2,400 individuals have signed the petition who are trained in fields other than science or whose field of specialization was not specified on their returned petition.

Of the 19,700 signatures that the project has received in total so far, 17,800 have been independently verified and the other 1,900 have not yet been independently verified. Of those signers holding the degree of PhD, 95% have now been independently verified. One name that was sent in by enviro pranksters, Geri Halliwell, PhD, has been eliminated. Several names, such as Perry Mason and Robert Byrd are still on the list even though enviro press reports have ridiculed their identity with the names of famous personalities. They are actual signers. Perry Mason, for example, is a PhD Chemist.

Al Patterson Contributing Member • Posts: 777
One question, and please answer it...

It appears that the polar ice cap on Mars is also melting. Tell me what could cause this, with no SUVs or Neocons present?

Could it be that big yellow ball in the sky?

-- hide signature --

Al Patterson

Bob Blount Veteran Member • Posts: 7,441
Al Gore did not win an Oscar!

The producer of "Inconvenient Truth" won the Oscar but the slanted press covered opportunistic Gore holding the Oscar. How can the next Ice Age begin if the last one does not end?
--
Bob,

'We don't make a photograph with a camera; we bring to the act of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen, the music we have heard and the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams

Sony R1
Canon Pro1
Casio Z750
Nikon 3100

 Bob Blount's gear list:Bob Blount's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 7D
Matt Nelson Regular Member • Posts: 115
Scary.

Wow - the anti-global-warming voices here are pretty scary. Complete denial that there may be any merit in the opposing camp's statements.

On the one hand, you've got a bunch of scientists saying "Human activity is causing the planet to warm." On the other hand, you've got a bunch of scientists saying "Human activity is NOT causing the planet to warm."

At best, there is some debate about the issue

The problem is, we've only got one planet to experiment with. If it's true that humans are changing climate (either warm or cool, btw), then we are on the road to really screwing up the planet in ways that we may never be able to reverse. If not, then no worries.

With those kind of stakes in play, I say let's play it safe until we know for sure. Me, I'm trying to reduce my energy consumption.

Bob Blount Veteran Member • Posts: 7,441
Re: Symbolic of the entire fraudulent climate change movement

Ryan,

Very well put! Al Gore is buying credits from his own company from which no one else can buy credits so he is taking the money our of one pocket and putting it in his other pocket thus satisfying his personal carbon signature.

Professional scientists the World over subject their technical papers to pier review to insure technical accuracy. The Environmentalists stopped that years ago since they are all competing for the same grants to fund their perpetuation. If I can forecast the "END" next month I get more money that you do if your guestimate is the month after mine. Follows the money!

Ryan McDaniel wrote:

Let's see...we have the infamous "hockey stick" graph showing
dramatic warming, beyond anything in Earth's history, in just the
past century. Completely and thoroughly debunked as a lie and
quietly removed from the U.N.'s latest report (even though many
enviros no doubt still use it).

Then we have the computer simulations predicting run away warming
for the 21st century. That is, as long as you feed them the "right"
inputs. Only problem is they're not matching what we've observed in
just the few years we've been using them to alarm the world. So the
U.N. quietly reduced their predicted range of warming in the latest
report.

And then there was the NYT story about the north pole melting away.
Only problem was some Navy guy remembered and pulled out photos
from early nuclear sub visits where...GASP...there were massive
areas of open water at the north pole. During the 60's. Coolest
part of the 20th century. Cooling so "great" that it spawned the
"global cooling" scare of the 70's.

What else...oh yes...we have the movement's top preacher lecturing
everyone on energy use...while he consumes 20x the energy of the
average American family at just one of his three homes. "I buy
credits!" he explains. Credits which reduce the total amount of CO2
output by exactly...ZERO. (Lookup: shell game.) Green Gore even has
the option at his infamous home to purchase only wind power at a
slightly higher cost. But I guess when your yearly bill is $30,000,
you go for cheap coal.

And now poor, defenseless, hopeless polar bears, clinging to one of
the last pieces of ice in the north, desperate for help before they
drown. (I can just hear Al Gore's audience gasping!) Only, they're
not drowning, they're playing. And they're not depressed, they're
happy. And they're not desperate, they're close to an ice shore and
swam out to the little bits of ice for some fun.

And if you study their numbers, you find they're not in any real
danger, and in fact would be growing if the world would ban all
polar bear hunting!

On top of that, it took a court order to get the crooks to pay the
photographer to misuse his image. If I were the photographer, I
would have sought an injunction against its misuse by
environmentalists.

What a pathetic joke this all is. And to think of all the time and
money wasted on "global warming" while their are children in the
world starving to death.

-- hide signature --

Bob,

'We don't make a photograph with a camera; we bring to the act of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen, the music we have heard and the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams

Sony R1
Canon Pro1
Casio Z750
Nikon 3100

 Bob Blount's gear list:Bob Blount's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 7D
Bob Blount Veteran Member • Posts: 7,441
Re: Symbolic of the entire fraudulent climate change movement

It is interesting that the same technology that cannot tell me if it is going to rain in ten days know the temperature of the ocean in 100 years and that global warming is going to last 1,000 years!

I guess the money ran out to support the next ice age theory starting from the scare tactics of the 1970's.
--
Bob,

'We don't make a photograph with a camera; we bring to the act of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen, the music we have heard and the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams

Sony R1
Canon Pro1
Casio Z750
Nikon 3100

 Bob Blount's gear list:Bob Blount's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 7D
rander3127 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,628
Re: Scary.

Matt Nelson wrote:

Wow - the anti-global-warming voices here are pretty scary.
Complete denial that there may be any merit in the opposing camp's
statements.

Scary? Did you know that certain members of the global warming club have suggest making public statements denying global warming a crime?
-Rich
Olympus E-1 and lots of lenses
CANADIANS using UPS: Beware hidden brokerage charges!

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/

Matt Nelson Regular Member • Posts: 115
Re: Scary.

yeah, so? that's scary too. what's you point? everybody's irrational? there's lots of evidence for that. so how do we start to fix that problem?

rander3127 wrote:

Matt Nelson wrote:

Wow - the anti-global-warming voices here are pretty scary.
Complete denial that there may be any merit in the opposing camp's
statements.

Scary? Did you know that certain members of the global warming
club have suggest making public statements denying global warming a
crime?

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads